Saturday, November 21, 2015

Echoes Down the Corridors - Part FIVE - Islam

In the beginning of this writing, I spoke about
how we all enter into the coliseum to observe, along with others, what is going
on in the political arena. We enter to see who is in the fight, who seems to be
the strongest opponent and why, and who is the most favored among the people.

As a Christian, I believe that we should be aware
of all that is going on around us, just as surely as all the people of God were
aware, as we can clearly see in the writings of the prophets, the apostles and
Christ Jesus Himself.

None of them were ignorant of who the kings were,
what they stood for or against, how strong or how weak they were in their rule,
and yes, even the attitude of the people regarding those who ruled over them.

After the flood, beginning with Nimrod and
onward, we read about the choosing of judges and kings, as well as their rise
and fall and whether the nature of their rule was with good or evil intent and
purposes, and whether their overall governance was righteous or tyrannical.

The difference between biblical scholars and
theologians is most often not understood by the average Christian lay person. I
am no expert on the subject, yet in my learning from studies, not only did I
discover that there is a difference in the categories and labours of the two,
but also that the two are not always harmonious, or work together.

I also learned briefly of systematic theology in
relation to biblical theology. The fact also discovered is that scholars may be
hostile, indifferent or supportive of biblical truths concerning the various
aspects of characters, places or chronicles occurring throughout the epochs recorded
in the Bible, from Genesis in the OT right through to the last book of
Revelation in the NT.

Many scholars
still debate eschatology, and others remain circumspect in their conclusions
regarding the biblical accounts of judges and kings, conflicts, wars and
miraculous events. Some postulate that the Bible is fraught with ambiguities
and note severity of God’s judgments rife throughout the narratives.

Studying the writings of biblical scholars and
theologians can certainly be insightful, yet can also at times create
confusion, perplexity, and even disorientation. Is it not wiser to wait upon the teaching of
the Holy Spirit and to trust God with a child-like faith? We all go through diverse stages in our faith
walk; it is said to be an ongoing process of progression.

For therein is the righteousness of God
revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live
by faith.[Rom 1:17]

It had been mentioned how just one email that had been sent to me gave me pause. In fact,
it caused me to delay posting articles on this series that were already
completed by a week and a half.

Additionally, it caused me to go back over what I
intended to post and expand and expound, such as I am doing here. Why? As
mentioned before, I originally began this merely to announce the winner of the
2015 Canadian election. I did not vote
and I knew little about any of the candidates, having been out of the country
for several years.

When I began researching and studying certain
reports and articles, there was a stirring in my spirit. I continued on with my
digging, but I also wanted to be sensitive to the Lord’s leading. What was the stirring in my spirit? I had to
wait to have it revealed to me.

I came to understand that the stirring, of
course, had to do with eschatology, a branch of Christian theology and “the study of final things”. It is the
study of end times, biblical prophecies and the signs and events of the final
days.

Think about how much closer we are. The last days
began in the time of the apostles, after Christ’s ascension. If the disciples considered it to be the
beginning of the last days at that time, then we are indeed in the last of the
last days now.

The article did not give me pause in considering
whether I should write anymore about political matters or not, but rather to
consider and better understand the position of many believers that I may not
have adequately considered.

There were also personal matters that gave me pause
as well. That being said, these writings are leading up to a panoramic view
that shows the astounding accuracy of biblical prophecies that reveal where we
are in the timeline.

Never before in history has the world witnessed such
global chaos, unexplained weather conditions, intensity and frequencies of
violent storms, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, economic woes, and much more.
Many are carefully watching Israel and the Middle East.

However, the war on civilians which is spreading
globally is evidenced not only in the recent Paris attacks, which has caused a
terror alert to spread across Europe, but it is also seen in the millions of
refugees from over 50 countries seeking asylum, with statistics revealing that
worldwide displacement has now hit a record high of all-time.

In the last century, and particularly the past
fifty or so years, we have witnessed many prophecies fulfilled; however, there
are still prophecies that have yet to come to pass. Jesus’ warnings of the last days included one
about false prophets and teachers who would arise and deceive many.

When a person shares a prophetic word from God
(and I have) or gives a prophecy, it is never to be considered scripture. It
simply is not. Nor is it to be added to scripture, nor should it ever take away
from or conflict with scripture. Everything and I do mean everything should be taken to the Lord. We are to try the spirit to
see if it is of God.

Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false
prophets are gone out into the world.

Hereby know ye the Spirit of God: Every spirit that confesses that
Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is of God: And every spirit that confesses
not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God: and this is that spirit
of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now
already is it in the world.[1Jn 4:1-3]

Any prophetic word that does not line up with
scripture or is out of the character and ways of God, as revealed in Bible must
not be received. Some dismiss prophetic
words altogether, insisting that God no longer speaks through people.

In the first book of Thessalonians, verses 17-20,
tell us to pray without ceasing, to give thanks and not to quench the Holy
Spirit, not to despise prophesying, to prove all things and to hold fast to
what is good.

On a final note, I would also like to say that I
do believe that the judgment of God has begun. There are many who believe
Christians do not come under God’s judgment, but that is not true. Others believe
it will come later, and others still confuse God’s judgment with God’s wrath, known
as the day of the Lord.

For the time is come
that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin
at us, what shall the end be of
them that obey not the gospel of God? [1Pet
4:17]

It is my intent to expound on this later on, but
let us try to keep things orderly. Yes, I am lacing the series throughout with
biblical references, weaving scriptures and commentaries in, but that is to be expected
since all that I do is for His glory alone. Without Him, I am nothing, and
nothing I do would mean anything. In Him
I live and move and have my being. He is exalted above all.

I will give the reader a small heads up, in that
my beliefs are not Preterist, nor do I believe that Christians are to
prepare the world for the Lord’s coming through social justice, or by political involvement and actions to bring
about the necessary “change(s)” in society in order to “purge the earth” of wickedness before Jesus/Yeshua returns. The Bible is clear that we will not purge
evil. Only the Sovereign God can do that, and He will, but in the time and way
He chooses.

Nor do I condone (and exhort
believers to avoid) the doctrines of the Emergent Church, New Apostolic Reformation
(who believe they are growing faster than Islam), Dominionism, Universalism,
New Age et al, which I will touch upon later on. That should be enough to whet the whistle and
provide some insight into what I do not believe. As one continues reading, it
will become evident what I do believe the Bible teaches and reveals.

The first book of Timothy
(1Timothy 1) begins with: (emphasis mine)

Now the Spirit speaks expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart
from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of
devils;

The chapter ends with:

Take heed unto yourself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for
in doing this you shall both save yourself, and them that hear you.[vs
16]

There are times we can see a fair distance ahead
when we are led in a certain direction, and other times, we only see a short
distance, and finally, there are times, we only see one step at a time.

The aforementioned article by Andrew Strom challenged
the integrity of the sincere Christian regarding politics. In his writing, he exhorts the true disciple
of Christ Jesus to avoid politics at all cost because in his opinion “Politics isruining Christianity”. The
political arena seems to be what he calls the “devil’s arena”.

The article is only mentioned again here, not for
the purpose of argumentation or persuasion, but to firstly, reveal the
different viewpoints regarding politics among believers, and secondly, to
declare that we must each choose for ourselves where we stand, albeit with the
guidance and help of the Living God.

It would seem to me that Strom’s upset leans more
towards those in the pulpit who take biblical principles to the extreme and stir
up their congregations, instilling bitterness and advocating rash actions
(armed or otherwise) against government and its policies and laws. The more
controversial topics of homosexuality, gay marriage, abortion or marijuana
legalization, which have recently seen (or await) changes in legislation, were
not mentioned by Strom.

That was the conclusion I arrived at after taking
over a week to consider what exactly he was saying by rereading his article and
taking the matter to the Lord, which is what all of us are required to do, in
all things.

I did note that no scripture was used in Strom’s
article, except for a quick reference to Jesus’ words that his “kingdom is not of this world”. To keep balance and in all fairness, I also
provided articles by Rev. Mark Creech, who has a different perspective on the
matter of politics. (See part FOUR of this series)

I do not know either of these men, so favoritism
toward either is out of the equation.
How does one choose a side in any battle if one does not know what
either side stands for, believes in, contends for, or if it is scripturally
based?

When given a panoramic (which the Bible does
splendidly), one can make informed judgments and decisions, preferably free
from discrimination, bias, bigotry and intolerance, especially if we wait on
the Lord for His direction. We continue
to learn daily, yet at times not without error, which in itself can be a keen
teacher if we allow it to be.

In the first part of this series, I spoke about
eschatology and how some do not believe that the study of end times is part of
the gospel message or something Jesus/Yeshua spoke about. Yet, His apostles were concerned.

When they had been with Jesus at the temple, He
warned them that not one stone would be left unturned; the temple would be
destroyed. They queried Him about when it would happen, about what would be the
sign of His coming (His return), and of the end of the world.

Jesus spoke to the disciples privately on the Mount
of Olives. He went into great detail about the events that would occur; about
those who would be offended by His people and afflict, persecute and kill them. He warned of betrayals and hatred, the increase in sin and the rising up of many false
prophets.

He covered everything to look for in both the
physical, celestial and spiritual realms. I will not go into all the details
here, but all that He warned about is found in the twenty-fourth chapter of the
book of Matthew.

If the disciples wanted to be prepared, and if
Jesus found their question worthy of such a lengthy reply, we would be wise to
delve into biblical eschatology. If He
spoke about nations and kingdoms and wars, then we surely must watch these
things. That would mean that we must pay attention to politics, to what leaders
(both political and religious) or kingdoms are rising up against each other.

We have been watching it all unfold for decades
now, but it does not take a genius to see how everything is escalating
globally, and at an exponential pace. One can choose to sit on the fence, or
one can choose to love the Lord God first, cleave to Him and wait patiently for
His direction. He will not go against
His Word or His character, and that will means that we must come to know both
in a very personal and intimate way.

Hot, Cold or Lukewarm?

Even God
Himself requires that we take a stand, either a passionate one with great zeal,
or an impassionate one with lackluster performance. Either stance will reveal which side one is
on; there is no guessing. However, those
who sit on the fence, remaining lukewarm, God rejects vehemently.

There are those who are violent in their
zealousness and those who are violent in their coldness; neither side is right
in resorting to violence. Then there are the lukewarm who chant, “Why can’t we all just get along?” with
an almost hypnotic charm that seduces both the lambs in the fold and the
unsaved.

One can almost see the charmer dancing “through
the tulips”, tossing petals of exotic flowers, confetti and sugarplums in the
air, complete with a pasted (fake) smile, a form of godliness and an enchanting
voice. “Love, love, love, love, love –
let’s all just get along!” Beyond
surreal, it is cloaked deception that seduces.

Remember that the common thread throughout the
series has been about extremism. Even those who sit on the fence can be extreme
and even have the loudest voices. Do not be deceived. These are not to be
mistaken for peacemakers.

Blessedarethe peacemakers: for they shall be
called the children of God. [Mat 5:9]

The
fence-sitters cannot be trusted, which is why God Himself rejects them. They
are often wolves in sheep’s clothing that will betray the true ones in an
instant, like Judas did with Jesus. They appear to be loyal and involved, but
are self-serving, loyal to none but themselves.

In all that we say and do, we must take a stand.
Even God demands it. One can be neutral until they come to a decision, but one
cannot remain neutral, as a means to avoid offending anyone. No matter what one
decides, opposition can be expected. Jesus spoke truth because He is truth, and
He offended many. We have the power to
choose where we stand, and choose we must.

I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot: I would (rather)
that you were cold or hot. So then
because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew you
out of My mouth.[Rev 3:15, 16]

Real love will be deeply moved by the suffering
of another, we weep. As a disciple of Christ, there will be a groaning and
travailing in our spirit that moves us to prayer, whether the suffering is that
of a widow or orphan, or of one very close to us, or whether it is the
suffering of those that we do not know, the sick or wounded, the oppressed and
possessed, or the persecuted and murdered.

Statistics for persecution due to religious
beliefs are accurately shown on a world watch list, provided by opendoorsusa.org. Unless otherwise stated, the above photos are
credited to Open Doors from a video they posted on Youtube.

The shortest verse in the Bible is John 11:35 – Jesus wept. Even though Jesus/Yeshua
knew that He would be raising Lazarus from the grave, four days after his
death, He was deeply troubled to see the anguish and sorrow, the great
suffering of His friends and those who had gathered to mourn Lazarus’
passing. He was troubled and groaned
deep within His spirit and wept.

Love bears the nail scars that paid the price for
salvation. Love covers a multitude of sins. Love lays down their life for a
friend, which is what our Saviour did for us, so that sinful man could be
reconciled to a holy God.

Similitude with Trudeau and Obama

I have already shown that the two leaders both
promoted “change” during their campaigns; both defend and approve abortions
(with approval for gender-specific abortion waiting in the wings); both approve
homosexuality and same sex marriage, but does the similitude cease there? I think not.

Although the focus thus far in this series has
been on President Obama and Prime Minister Trudeau, and though I will yet
continue on with another similitude, please keep in mind that these two men are
only two pieces of a puzzle. It is only once the puzzle is put together
completely that the entire work makes sense. As the saying goes, “A picture tells a thousand words.”

We all should be watchmen…people who watch, warn
and pray.

For thus has the Lord said unto me, Go, set a watchman, let him
declare what he sees. [Is 21:6]

Trudeau - Which Side Does He Stand On?

One of the most controversial topics amongst both
supporters and critics of the new Prime Minister has been his visits to mosques
in Canada. The supporters decry that
Trudeau was at one time a drama teacher and his participation was merely for
show.

Other supporters decry that his actions prove his
acceptance for different religious groups and their beliefs. His critics deem the act as “outrageous” and “intellectually dishonest”.

It
was his association with radical Islamists that was disconcerting. Supporters
of Trudeau would call any mentioning of these things a ‘smear campaign’, and
critics insist the prime minister supports the Islamic extremists more than the
Muslims who desire to live peaceably.

More controversy arose when it was reported that Justin Trudeau visited a mosque in Regina. Nathan Liewiccki, a reporter for Regina's Leader-Post was quoted as saying, "A party (Liberal) spokesperson said Trudeau was going to be at the mosque and that the media were not able to attend." That statement has not been denied or confirmed.

However, an unnamed reporter for the Sun stated that a spokesman form the mosque sent him an email, in which he had written: "It was wrongly reported to the media that they were not allowed to attend. The coordinator from the Liberal party was asked to arrange for a media person if they wanted."

Well, perhaps the Liberal party coordinator just did not "want" to. Supporters for Trudeau claim that accuse critics of "islamophobia". In December 2012, Trudeau was a key speaker at the "Reviving the Islamic Spirit" conference.

In order to make an informed decision about a
matter, one must listen to the voices that know first-hand, who were either personally
involved in the event in question, or who knew through association with those
involved. The more information a person has about someone or something, the
more likely they are to make wise decisions.

When Justin Trudeau went to the Al Sunnah Al-Wahhabi
mosque (Sunni Islam) branch in Montreal, some media sources trumpeted that the
U.S. Department of Defense had the mosque on its “watch list” and was known to “recruit, facilitate or train al-Qaeda
members”.

“Trudeau’s response, full of sass,
was that “we in Canada have our own determinations for those sorts of
things because the U.S. is known to make mistakes from time to time,” with
regards to a Pentagon terrorism-links list.

Somehow this notion that American military documents
are haphazardly compiled and have no credibility has creeped [sic] through not just
Justin’s campaign team, but media outlets as well. Jonathan Kay of the
National Post assured us that anyone who would feel such a way believes
that “Trudeau was born in Kenya”, and that because the mosque in question
last harboured terrorists in the ‘90s, there’s absolutely no cause for alarm.” True
North Times

When visiting the mosque’s online website (which
was taken down after the media questioned Trudeau’s visit in 2014), questions
arose about whether or not the Wahhabi mosque supported female genital
mutilation, as well as the promoting of polygamy.

The mosque’s online library included books such
as Tenets of Faith, which wrote about
what to do with unbelievers, thieves or adulterers. The book states that thieves should have their
hands cut off and adulterers should be stoned. However, the harshest judgment
falls upon unbelievers.

Excerpt from Tenets of Faith:

“We hold that whoever claims that there is, besides Islam, a religion
in existence today that is acceptable to Allah – whether it be the religion of
the Jews, Christians or others – is an unbeliever (kaafir). His repentance should be sought; if he
refuses to repent, he is to be killed as an apostate (murtad) because of
rejecting the Quran.”

Jason Kenney, Minister of Employment and Social
Development (Vancouver) remarked on the “consistent
bad judgment” on Trudeau’s part. Kenney went on to say that Trudeau was the
same man who had made excuses for the Boston bombers, “without knowing who they were or why they murdered their fellow
Americans”.

He critiqued Trudeau as the same man “who agreed to speak at a conference, at
which one of the sponsors, IRFAN, who is now known to be a funder of the
banned, anti-Semitic terrorist organization Hamas.

And this is a man who criticized me for publishing a citizen guide
that condemned certain, barbaric cultural practices…he said that he thought it
was insensitive of me to refer to so-called honour crimes and killings as being
barbaric.”

Many have come to the conclusion that with the
hours Justin Trudeau has spent behind closed doors with the group that he is
well aware of their ties with Hamas. It
is interesting to note that the new Prime Minister’s advisor is none other than
Saudi-born Omar Alghabra. He is formerly
the president of the Canadian Arab Federation, which is an anti-Semitic group
that is known to be a supporter of radical Islam.

Ezra Levant, a Jewish-Canadian media personality, lawyer, writer and broadcaster, wrote his thoughts down in an article shortly after the visit. Keep in mind that Mr. Levant is a former columnist for Sun news, which is known to support the Conservatives. Levant himself is a political activist on the Conservative side. Nevertheless, he writes some thought-provoking statements, but please do keep the Conservative slant of his comments as a way of balancing the facts.Excerpt: (Note* - No editing is done on his article; it is posted verbatim, with the exception of limited paragraphing, for the sake of space.)

"In 2013, when he was campaigning
in a Muslim mosque in Calgary, Justin Trudeau bragged about how many mosques he
visits in his hometown of Montreal. He listed them: the Bangladeshi
mosque, the Pakistani mosque, the North African mosque and the Wahhabi mosque. The first three are geographical
locations. But Wahhabi Islam is an ideology, not a place.

Wahhabism is to the rest of
Islam what the Ku Klux Klan is to the rest of Christianity. It’s an extremist
fringe that believes in violence. Or, as it’s called in Arabic, jihad.

Wahhabism was an obscure sect
until the dictators of Saudi Arabia decided to bankroll it. Over the past 30
years, an estimated $100 billion of Saudi oil money has been pumped into
mosques around the world, on the condition that they follow Wahhabism. That
includes mosques in Canada."

Excerpt:"Other Liberals with better
judgment realized how bad Trudeau looked, especially when Hamas’s terrorism is
on TV each night. Ralph Goodale, the last Liberal MP in Saskatchewan, said the
U.S. terrorism report only came out after Trudeau visited the mosque, and that
in any event, it was “trivial.”

But the Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiah
has been in the news for more than a decade. It’s where the Ahmed Ressam, the
convicted Millennium Bomber, prayed. It has received international coverage, in
PBS, the Associated Press, and in a half dozen Canadian newspapers for
extremism, going back to the year 2000. And then there’s that major documentary
on Montreal CBC in 2006.

Maybe Justin Trudeau didn’t know
any of that. But he knows now. And he is very clear, no matter what Goodale
says. He still says he’s “proud” to campaign at the Wahhabi mosque. We should
believe him."

The National Post published an article by Ingrid Ravarty-Konopka, former assistant of Justin Trudeau, in which she states:

“On March 11, 2011, I sent Liberal leader Justin Trudeau to the
Al-Sunnah Al-Nabawiah mosque in Montreal — yes, that mosque. For
five years, between 2008 and 2013, I was his constituency executive assistant.
I ran his life outside of Ottawa. I sent him to churches, mosques, temples —
Sikh, Buddhist and Hindu. If his riding had had synagogues, I would have sent
him there, too.”

"This is not to say the mosque in question is without controversy. It preaches the most rigid interpretation of Islam: Wahhabism. We now know from leaked U.S. government memos that “known Al-Qaeda members were recruited, facilitated or trained” at the mosque in the late 1990s. This information was made public in April 2011 — a month after Trudeau’s visit."Comment of Sheldon Lerman, Thornhill, Ontario:

"In her article, Justin Trudeau’s former assistant, Ingrid Ravary-Konopka, discusses how she sent the Liberal leader to a mosque in Montreal that she says, “preaches the most rigid interpretation of Islam: Wahhabism,” and from which, as she later learned, “known Al-Qaeda members were recruited, facilitated or trained.”

She describes how “in settings such as this … Trudeau would always champion Canadian values, such as acceptance, women’s rights, the responsibilities of citizenship and diversity.” That sounds good, but then comes the kicker: “While much of this may sound like sentimental platitudes, for many in Papineau it might very well have been the first time any of these ideas had been expressed to them.”

The first time? Really? If this is true — if people can immigrate to Canada without first demonstrating an understanding of basic Canadian values and declaring their acceptance and commitment to these values — we face a serious problem. Within the parameters of our basic values, there’s much room for diversity and debate. But we can’t wait until after people have arrived and then try convincing them to accept our values and our way of life. By then it may be (and often is) much too late."

Approximately two months after Trudeau’s visit to
the Montreal mosque, on October 20, 2014, a lone-wolf terroist, considered to
have been inspired by ISIL, ran down two Canadian soldiers (one in uniform, one
in civilian clothing) in the parking lot of a shopping centre in
Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu, Quebec. One soldier survived, the other died.

artin Couture-Rouleau, age 25 (above photos), who had converted to
Islam only a year previously, was a francophone (French-speaking) Canadian. He was shot and killed after a police chase
that ended when the suspect lost control of his vehicle.

Two days later, October 22, 2014, Zehaf-Bibeau,
age 32, said to be a radicalized jihadist and terrorist opened fire on
Parliament Hill in Ottawa, fatally wounding a Canadian Forces member, Cpl.
Nathan Cirillo, 24, who was standing guard at the National War Memorial. Shots were fired inside the Parliament
building before the gunman was killed by the House of Commons sergeant-at-arms.

PM Trudeau told CTV News in an exclusive
interview (aired Saturday, October 24) that he fully intends to keep his
promise of allowing 25,000 Syrian refugees to come to Canada by the end of
2015. That is approximately six weeks
away.

The screening and security process is crucial to
carry out with the refugee applicants coming from Syria, due to possible
infiltration of Islamic terrorists. Some of the Canadian immigration officers
are concerned that Trudeau is pushing the process so quickly that proper
screening and security may not be properly or fully carried out.

“Trudeau dismissed suggestions his plan would compromise Canadians’
security as many of those seeking refuge in Europe and North America are coming
from a territory controlled or affected by the violence of the self-proclaimed
Islamic State, whose leaders openly call for terrorist attacks on Canadian
soil.

No one is suggesting we should put aside security in order to (bring
in refugees),” he told the crowd. People fleeing Syria can be properly assessed
by employing more case workers, increasing screening capacity and “looking at
the possibility of airlifts,” Trudeau said.

In July 2014, three and a half months before the
election, Liberal leader Justin Trudeau wrote a letter to the Muslim community
after his visit to the Islamic Foundation of Toronto where he participated in
Iftaar Iftaar (breaking of the fast) during Ramadan, which is considered a holy
month by Muslims.

Islam is considered to be the fastest-growing
religion in Canada, according to an article in the Canadian Encyclopedia,
which was posted in 2011, but edited in 2015.

A letter
signed “Justin” was sent to the Toronto Muslims stating:

I am thankful for the diversity and religious freedoms which we enjoy in
Canada, and I am proud of the accomplishments and contributions made by
Canada’s thriving Muslim community.

I wish my Muslim brothers and sisters a blessed Ramadan, and pledge to
continue standing up for all Canadians to protect the values that unite us.
Ramadan Mubarak! The Toronto Muslims proudly published the whole
letter.

“Morsi’s Muslim
Brotherhood is anti-Christian, anti-Semitic and prolifically intolerant.” (Charles Kauthammer of Washington Post) John Kerry (U.S. Secretary
of State) travelled to Egypt to give $250 million to Morsi and the Brotherhood.

In an article called The Real Voice of Egypt, Eman Nabih writes that Egyptians accuse the
Brotherhood, stating that the MB (Muslim Brotherhood), “humiliated our humanity, dignity and pride”, “raped childhood innocence” (at age 9), “practiced circumcision on females”, “cut girls’ hair in schools to force the veil” and “incited Muslims against Christians”, “burned Christian churches and forced them to
leave their homes” and “called
Christians enemies of God and profaned their blood”.

Nabih, a female journalist who lives in Egypt,
knows first-hand and writes about the realities occurring in her country and
amongst her people. In the above mentioned article, she wrote:

“On 30/6/2013 we broke all restrictions.
Muslims attached to their Christian sisters and brothers in Egypt and walked
together, the path we have chosen with our own free will to release our country
from the Muslim Brotherhood pure evil black terror. We revolted to get back
Egypt again from a regime who tried to erase and smash a 7000 years civilization
entity and identity.”

She permits people
to use her material, but requests that a link is provided to her site, as she
spends countless hours gathering information.
As one who also spends an incredible amount of time doing the same, I
find her request not only fair, but also very gracious, as she does not request
that you write her for permission. Eman Nabih

Wahhab

Wikipedia is
considered by many to be a problematic site due to the fact that anyone can
author, edit or add to an entry whether they have credentials or not. Others contend that Wikipedia contains useful
and valid information and that no one would use the site if it was full of
false data.

Unfortunately, the
reality that anyone has the freedom to add to, edit or write any given entry
makes the possibility of deception through misinformation or disinformation
left wide open. Therefore, the onus is
on the reader to scrutinize and validate what they read by researching other
reputable sources.

Wikipedia: Wahhabism
is Arabic (وهابية – Wahhābiya
([Arabic transliteration]) and is known as a branch of Sunni Islam (a religious
movement). The Islamic Supreme Council describes
the “Influence of Wahhabism Today”.

Wahhabi Mosque

Excerpts from material written by
the Islamic Supreme Council:

“The Wahhabi ideology is
antagonistic to non-Muslims and to traditional practices including seeking
intercession by means of the pious saints in Islam, accepted by traditional
Sunni Islam for over 1400 years.

By rejecting any form of hierarchy such as that followed by
traditional Sunni schools, the Wahhabis rejected traditional rulings on a wide
range of subjects, invalidated the four schools of thought and its accepted
interpretations of law, as well as issued declarations of unbelief for those
who agreed.

While this new ideology prohibited many traditional Islamic
forms of worship, its followers did not become overtly militant until
recently. Now “Wahhabi” followers have
taken up an increasingly confrontational standpoint attempting to impose their
ideology in many regions around the world.

The Wahhabi mentality asserts that Islam may be reformed by
means of the sword. Thus the movement has manifested itself as armed
insurrections throughout the world, especially where governments are weak and
unable to resist aggression effectively.”
Islamic Supreme Council

Hari Sreenivasan, an anchor for PBS Newshour
Weekend, wrote that Rashid Khalidi, a professor of modern Arab studies
(Columbia University) “disputes that the Quran offers any justification for
beheading. He cites the lines coming immediately after one of the two verses
used to justify the act:

“Therefore, when you meet the unbelievers, smite at their
necks.” But the very next line, contained in Chapter 47, Verse 4: “At length,
when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind the captives firmly. Therefore is
the time for either generosity or ransom.”
PBS

"Islam
must be seen by our new generation, as a system of life. A system
characterized by rules and recommendations that guide and influence all aspects
of our lives.” - Samer Majzoub,
President of Canadian Muslim Force.

BC Mosque

The Jamia Masjid mosque in Surrey, BC was visited
by then-Liberal leader Justin Trudeau and seen wearing a jalabiya, an
Arab-style Muslim robe, and was a participant in a (religious) prayer ritual
called the Salat
Al-Maghrib. The
participant has to state their intentions to pray (3 Fard, 2 sunnah and 2
Nafl).

At the end of the prayers, the “shahada” is spoken
in Arabic. It is the Islamic Creed, known as one of the Five Pillars of Islam.
The shahadi (verb) means the person “testifies”
or “bears witness” to the “truth” that Allah is one true God and
Mohammed is the Messenger of Allah (true prophet). Welland
Tribune is one of the news sites to critique Trudeau’s involvement in the
ritual.

The
Tribune writes: Did Trudeau convert to Islam? Did the people praying with
him think he did? If so, did he mean it?

It’s one thing
to visit a mosque on Monday, a synagogue on Tuesday and a gay pride parade on
Wednesday — all are part of a pluralistic Canada. But to say the shahada is
more than showing tolerance or friendship to one faith. It’s to join that faith
by testifying that it’s the only true faith.

Add in a
recent speech Trudeau made to the Muslim Council of Calgary, in which he boasts
of visiting Montreal’s wahhabi mosque — that’s the fundamentalist, Saudi-style
extremist version of Islam that counts as is followers Osama bin Laden. Is it
all political theatre, or is Trudeau actually going there?

In May 2013, the Toronto
Sun reported on the fact that the then-Liberal leader Justin Trudeau’s
wife Sophie Gregoire-Trudeau, along with her mother-in-law Margaret, donned the
Muslim hijab head covering on Mother’s Day and was officially released.

Some may shrug and say it was done out of respect
for the culture, but when the shahada is recited in front of two or more Muslim
men, they are considered witnesses. It
is to “testify” of their faith. This is known to be the sole requirement to
convert to Islam (Islamic law requirement). Therefore the critics and skeptics are
frowning upon the prime minister’s wife and mother wearing the hijab.

One has to wonder…when a political leader
downplays the seriousness of the Islamic terrorists’ infiltration of Syria and
the possibility that they could blend in with the refugees to infiltrate a host
country, it is troubling, particularly after the terrorist attacks in Quebec
and Ottawa.

When that leader has also been known to frequent
mosques, speak at meetings such as “Reviving
the Islamic Spirit” conferences, and has an advisor who supports radical
Islam, is that leader genuinely concerned about the country’s security, or does
he also support radical Islam? These are fair questions.

One truly has to consider such a possibility. The
words of charismatic leaders in the past who won the hearts of the people, only
to be known later for their betrayal, sleight of hand and deception echo down
the corridors of history.

This is the same leader that accused the
then-Prime Minister Steven Harper, in March 2015, of “deliberately sowing fear and prejudice against Muslims in
Canada.”

He also severely
reprimanded Harper for his comments about a court ruling that disallowed the
wearing of the niqab over the face (religious garment) by Muslim women during
citizenship ceremonies.

“It is a cruel joke to claim you are liberating people from oppression
by dictating in law what they can and cannot choose to wear.” Justin Trudeau further stated, “We all know what is going on here. It is nothing less than an attempt to play on
people’s fears and foster prejudice, directly toward the Muslim faith.”National
Post - Canada

Since my intention is to provide readers with a
bird’s eye view of both sides, I include the following. The writer at Muslimlink.ca is a Muslim woman
named Massey Hoveyda. The day after the October 19 election, she wrote:

“I think our duties as citizens of this
country has [sic] only begun. Voting for change is one thing,
but lobbying for it, tracking electoral promises and ensuring they become a
reality, is the true essence of citizenship.”

Excerpt 2:

It seemed apparent that the Harper
government expected, via some distorted understanding of Islam, that as a
Muslim Canadian, I stood in constant risk of spontaneous combustion of my moral
and religious beliefs, of being oppressed as a woman or
becoming radicalized as a Muslim.

I was, therefore, considered a constant
walking, breathing threat to Canadian safety and society. What I saw
as freedom in religious expression like the niqab (which is not a requirement
of Islam and which I personally do not agree with, BUT accept as a
form of peaceful religious expression protected under our Charter of Rights and
Freedoms) were identified by my government as Barbaric Cultural Practices.

Whereas I had before been recognized as an
active member of my community and as a Canadian citizen, I was
now considered a second-class citizen with the possibility of being
stripped of my citizenship should the government deem it necessary.

.

Excerpt 3:

“I am a Muslim Canadian, and to me this duty is now of even higher
importance, as we work to ensure that Canada steers clear of the darkness,
racism and the politics of hate which has shadowed our communities in
the past decade – that we remain an inclusive, fair and transparent society
that works as a united front towards the establishment of justice and equality
for all Canadians.

Mr. Trudeau made reference, during his
victory speech last night, to a Muslim woman wearing a hijab who held
up her little girl to him and expressed gratitude for giving her a chance to
choose what she wore as a woman and to be lifted from the ranks of second class
citizenship.

This meant a lot to me. It is a moment
that has become etched in my mind, as both a woman and a Muslim citizen of this
country, as a turning point in the climate of Canadian politics because I had
sadly forgotten what it meant to be acknowledged and respected by my Prime
Minister.”Muslim Link - Canada

No comments:

Post a Comment

Translate To Any Language

Overcomers

About Me

Fear the Lord and tremble at His word. The second death is real.
--------
Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand. The last of the last days are upon us, and just as in the days of Noah (Noe), most don't want to hear it, saying;
Where is the promise of His coming, for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of creation. [2Pet 3:4]
And this is the will of Him that sent Me, that everyone which sees the Son, and believes on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day. [Jn 6:40] (words of Jesus/Yeshua)